| 1 |
On Thursday 11 November 2004 06:58 pm, Jörg Schaible wrote: |
| 2 |
> Seesh. You're right. I was talking about CFLAGS. Now, is there a policy for |
| 3 |
> "standard accepted safe CFLAGS" ? I know, it is my problem, if something |
| 4 |
> really breaks. But I have really a lot of apps running with my (not too |
| 5 |
> esoteric) settings, and if one single app fails badly (just core dumps) and |
| 6 |
> I can track it down to a single CFLAG flag, what is the actual policy (if |
| 7 |
> there is one)? Why is a filter for the flag just recected? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
no policy really |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
generally if the user is using extended (read: stupid) CFLAGS, developers may |
| 12 |
tell them to fix their CFLAGS |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
if a package can be found to blow up while using one flag regardless of the |
| 15 |
rest of the CFLAG settings (except for perhaps -O#), then generally we |
| 16 |
flag-filter it |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
policy ? none |
| 19 |
too much policy makes jack a dull boy; dull boys dont get girls; no girls |
| 20 |
means no kids; poor jack dies alone and his seed does not live on |
| 21 |
-mike |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives